Distributive bargaining strategy is a competitive negotiation strategy for fixed or limited resources. It is also called as “Zero-Sum”, “Claiming Value” or Win-Lose” bargaining. Here the goals of both the parties are fundamentally and directly conflicting to the each other. The goal of the negotiator is to maximize their share of resources. It is necessary for a negotiator to understand and be familiar with the distributive bargaining strategy. There are few tactics one can follow, of which few are ethically accepted and few are not. The four tactical tasks for a negotiator in a distributive situation are: 1.     Analyze and assess the target, outcome values, resistance point and the cost of terminating negotiations of the other party: This involves understanding what the information is and how did they interpret this information based on which the other party has fixed its target and resistance points.  Indirect indicators such as observation, consulting documentation, talking to the experts might help assess the resistance points of him/her (other party) For direct assessment, the other party usually does not reveal the correct / accurate information regarding the above mentioned parameters - target, outcome values, and resistance point  2.     Manage the other party’s impression about the negotiator’s target, outcome value, resistance point, and terminating cost: This involves understanding the other party’s impression about the negotiators target, resistance point and termination costs by askingquestion to the other party and you saying as little as possible.  Reveal facts only required to support your case and direct the other party to form the impression as you desire and drive them to open up for new possibilities or options that are more favorable. It is also important to have control over emotional reactions to the situations, facts, proposals and outcomes. Action to change or alter the impression  3.     Modify other party’s perception of their target, resistance point, and cost of terminating negotiation.  4.     Manipulate the actual costs of terminating or delaying negotiations: This can involve disruptive actions such as increasing the costs of not reaching the agreement. Forming an alliance with outsiders who can influence the outcome values. Changing the scheduling which can be a considerable disadvantage for the other party and enhance your situation and guard you from the actions of the other party. References: Laurie R. Weingart, Leigh L. Thompson, Max H. Bazerman, John S. Carroll, (1990) "Tactical Behavior and Negotiation Outcomes", International Journal of Conflict Management, Vol. 1 Issue: 1, pp.7-31, Retrieved from http://0 dx.doi.org.library.acaweb.org/10.1016/j.jvb.1990.08.001 MOEHLER, M. (2010). The (stabilized) nash bargaining solution as a principle of distributive justice. Utilitas, 22(4), 447-473. http://0-dx.doi.org.library.acaweb.org/10.1017/S0953820810000348 Retrieved from https://0-search-proquest-com.library.

1. Distributive bargaining strategy is a competitive negotiation
strategy for fixed or limited resources. It is also called as
“Zero-Sum”, “Claiming Value” or Win-Lose” bargaining. Here
the goals of both the parties are fundamentally and directly
conflicting to the each other. The goal of the negotiator is to
maximize their share of resources.
It is necessary for a negotiator to understand and be familiar
with the distributive bargaining strategy. There are few tactics
one can follow, of which few are ethically accepted and few are
not.
The four tactical tasks for a negotiator in a distributive situation
are:
1. Analyze and assess the target, outcome values, resistance
point and the cost of terminating negotiations of the other
party: This involves understanding what the information is and
how did they interpret this information based on which the other
party has fixed its target and resistance points.
Indirect indicators such as observation, consulting
documentation, talking to the experts might help assess the
resistance points of him/her (other party)
For direct assessment, the other party usually does not reveal
the correct / accurate information regarding the above
mentioned parameters - target, outcome values, and resistance
point
2. Manage the other party’s impression about the
negotiator’s target, outcome value, resistance point, and
terminating cost: This involves understanding the other party’s
impression about the negotiators target, resistance point and
termination costs by askingquestion to the other party and you
saying as little as possible.
Reveal facts only required to support your case and direct the
other party to form the impression as you desire and drive them
to open up for new possibilities or options that are more
favorable. It is also important to have control over emotional

2. reactions to the situations, facts, proposals and outcomes.
Action to change or alter the impression
3. Modify other party’s perception of their target, resistance
point, and cost of terminating negotiation.
4. Manipulate the actual costs of terminating or delaying
negotiations: This can involve disruptive actions such as
increasing the costs of not reaching the agreement. Forming an
alliance with outsiders who can influence the outcome values.
Changing the scheduling which can be a considerable
disadvantage for the other party and enhance your situation and
guard you from the actions of the other party.
References:
Laurie R. Weingart, Leigh L. Thompson, Max H. Bazerman,
John S. Carroll, (1990) "Tactical Behavior and Negotiation
Outcomes", International Journal of Conflict Management, Vol.
1 Issue: 1, pp.7-31, Retrieved from http://0
dx.doi.org.library.acaweb.org/10.1016/j.jvb.1990.08.001
MOEHLER, M. (2010). The (stabilized) nash bargaining
solution as a principle of distributive justice. Utilitas, 22(4),
447-473. http://0-
dx.doi.org.library.acaweb.org/10.1017/S0953820810000348
Retrieved from https://0-search-proquest-
com.library.acaweb.org/docview/761521578?accountid=9864
As a junior congress person you have been asked to help
promote a bill to allow casino gambling in your state. There is
much opposition to this bill. Using distributive bargaining,
discuss the pros and cons which might arise toward the passing
or defeating of this bill.
Regardless of the previously mentioned impediments, this
examination emphatically recommends that online lottery/casino
players have singular qualities related with more elevated
amounts of hazard than their disconnected partners. Past
examinations have discovered that Internet bettors, contrasted
with non-Internet bettors, demonstrate particular statistic

3. attributes that mirror a larger amount of powerlessness to
creating/keeping up gambling issue.
This investigation gives remarkable proof that online
lottery/casino players have an extra level of helplessness in
light of their unmistakable psychographic qualities. Note that
the investigation of psychographics is irreplaceable for
identifying the genuine level of hazard in light of the fact that
psychographics significantly contributes to the clarification of
the contrasts amongst on the web and disconnected players. The
calculated relapse models point to two exceptional discoveries.
To start with, the level of trust in the Internet is a pivotal
variable in clarifying the contrasts amongst on the web and
disconnected clients, both in lottery and additionally in casino
gambling.
This variable, which has scarcely been utilized as a part of past
research, could end up being a significant factor for future
examinations that explore, among different issues, why the
quantity of disconnected card sharks keeps on being
significantly bigger than the number of web based card sharks.
Second, the web based gambling setting is considerably more
conceivably risky for casinos than for the lottery.
Online casinos offer to speculators described by a more
grounded propensity to thrift and a lower level of amiability,
two psychographics that, in association with the more dangerous
states of the Internet scene, make these clients especially
defenseless: More extravagant card sharks will wager in a
domain where play is speedier furthermore, control over
spending more troublesome, and more against social card sharks
are inclined to wagering in a detached domain where the
assistance of others may not be accessible.
This cross-sectional investigation has quite recently analyzed
how the level of hazard for gambling issue is identified with
singular qualities at a given minute in time. Later on,
longitudinal examinations could inspect how the level of hazard
for gambling issue changes after some time because of varieties
in singular qualities.

4. Such a longitudinal approach would help speak to all the more
precisely the connection between hazard factors and gambling
issue, which is a characteristically unique wonder.
The reason for this adjustment is like that utilized to shield
subjects from the risks of shorelines, in which specialists
caution about, control, and even boycott washing in the ocean,
contingent upon both the level of target hazard existing on each
shoreline and the level of subjective hazard related with the
typical bathers of each shoreline.
There are a few constraints that diminish the capacity to reach
generalizable inferences from the outcomes got. Right off the
bat, the information utilized are generally illustrative of Spain,
yet it is as yet obscure whether the discoveries can be
specifically extrapolated, or should be particularly adjusted to
different nations.
References
Abbott, M. W., & Volberg, R. A. (1996). The New Zealand
national survey of problem and pathological gambling. Journal
of Gambling Studies, 12(2), 143–160.
Bergen, A. E., Newby-Clark, I. R., & Brown, A. (2012). Low
trait self-control in problem gamblers: evidence from self-report
and behavioral measures. Journal of Gambling Studies, 28(4),
637–648.
Black, D. W., Shaw, M., McCormick, B., & Allen, J. (2013).
Pathological gambling: relationship to obesity, self reported
chronic medical conditions, poor lifestyle choices, and impaired
quality of life. Comprehensive Psychiatry, 54(2), 97–104.
Breen, R. B., & Zimmerman, M. (2002). Rapid onset of
pathological gambling in machine gamblers. Journal of

5. Gambling Studies, 18(1), 31–43.
Clarke, D. (2004). Impulsiveness, locus of control, motivation,
and problem gambling. Journal of Gambling Studies, 20(4),
319–345.
Cole, T., Barret, D. J. K., & Griffiths, M. (2011). Social
facilitation in online and offline gambling: a pilot study.
International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction, 9(3),
240–247.
Cotte, J., & Latour, K. A. (2008). Blackjack in the kitchen:
understanding online versus casino gambling. Journal of
Consumer Research, 35(5), 742–758
Each of us perceives "ethics" from our own point of reference
as to what is or is not ethical. This assignment asks you to
consider ethics and whistleblowers. Select one of the behaviors
listed below for your discussion posting. Base your posting on
your relationship with the "unethical person" and any risk
involved in "whistleblowing".
Falsifying of documents is an example of unethical behavior in
businesses that employees engage themselves in and involves
altering or modifying business records which defraud businesses
and customers. It is certainly easier for employees to engage in
such malpractices and convince them it is not a big deal. Owing
to the fact that this unethical behavior costs employees and
customer’s money, it should not be avoided but necessary
actions should be taken to prevent it (Joshi, 2008). One’s moral
standards should not be dragged down by other actions of
failing to follow ethical behaviors, rather one should honor
himself/ herself and be honest. It is quite clear that practicing
honesty among employees is likely to halt the act of falsifying
the documents.
Whistleblowers in an organization come forward publicly when

6. they fail to receive an acceptable reply. They are often
ostracized and are faced with the dilemma of whether to protect
their employees or step forward when they notice inappropriate
behavior going on among employees. One of the risks involved
in whistleblowing is a breakdown of trust between employees
and managers. Due to this, challenges on effective working
relationships become rampant which creates a hostile
environment in the workplace. Whistleblowers are likely to
experience hostility and resentment from superiors and peers
which distracts employees from completing their assigned tasks
effectively (Chokprajakchat, 2017).
Breaking of a chain of command in a workplace is yet another
risk likely to occur due to whistleblowing. This risk makes
employees neglect the commands from their supervisors. Some
whistleblowers bypass the chain of command as they are
frightened of repercussions attributed to going against the
company. Whistleblowing in an organization can bring about
the market or legal related consequences. If the leaders in an
organization are observed to endorse or participate in unethical
and illegal activities, they are likely to face a fallout. Those
employees that do not take part in unethical practices, for
instance, falsifying documents, are likely to be affected if at all
the company faces public backlash.
References
Chokprajakchat, S. (2017). Whistleblowing in Thailand: Anti-
Corruption Policy in Thailand and a Whistleblower Protection
Measure. Whistleblowing in the World, 37-58. doi:10.1007/978-
3-319-48481-5_4
Joshi, J. (2008). Chapter-25 Fraud and Misconduct in Clinical
Research. Essentials of Medical Pharmacology, 423-436.
doi:10.5005/jp/books/10282_25
For any successful negotiation it is very important to understand
the phases and flow of negotiations:
Initiation:

7. The whole negotiation depends how it gets unfolded and hence
Initiation is a critical part of the negotiation process. It is very
important to understand the priorities, plan accordingly and
communicate correct information in an effective way to have a
successful negotiation. It is critical to set the right tone for the
discussion which in turn creates the environment or stage for
negotiation. “Oftentimes, the atmosphere you create and the
way in which you present your argument can mean more to the
transaction than any technical matters or financial terms”
(Jensen, K. 2010). Usually a good start and a good note helps
both the parties to carry out positive negotiation.
Problem Solving:
Like Initiation, the next phase in the flow of negotiation is also
important. It is crucial to gather the right information and
understand the other party’s stand. Once the information is
gathered, the ground for the bargaining is set and various
options are discussed. It is required to get all the requirements
of the other party. Any negotiator might encounter the three
components during problem solving phase: Undesirable
Situation, Desirable Situation, Obstacles while moving from
undesirable situation to a Desirable one.
Resolution:
After working through the problems and coming to a
conclusion, both the parties in this phase, close the deal by
committing to the agreement they have reached in the earlier
phase. “The objective of this stage is to build commitment to
the agreement achieved in the previous phase. Both the
negotiator and the other party have to assure themselves that
they reached a deal they can be happy with, or at least accept”
(Lewicki, R. J., Barry, B., & Saunders, D. M. 2016).
By following these phases it is highly likely that both the
parties can have a positive negotiation.
References:
Lewicki, R. J., Barry, B., & Saunders, D. M. (2016). Essentials
of negotiation.
Jensen, K. (2010, November 02). How to Open a Negotiation.

8. Retrieved March 30, 2018,
from https://keldjensen.wordpress.com/2010/11/02/how-to-
open-a-negotiation/
Delbecq, A. L., and Andrew H. Ven de Ven, “A Group Process
Model for Problem Identification and Program Planning,” The
Journal of Applied Behavioral Science 7, no. 4 (1971): 466–92
People are considered as hostages if they are snatched for
requirement or demand in a certain situation. Negotiating with
the people who take these hostages is very sensitive and needs
some amount of training. So, the job of negotiators is to create a
kind of reciprocal interest in between the authorities and the
people who take the hostages. There are many deadliest attacks
happened in the recent past, however, I would like to mention
the cruelest attack happened in September 2004 in the Beslan
school. The majority of the people killed in this incident are
students, out of the 331 people who were killed, 186 of them are
children. It is considered as the third deadliest terrorist attack
(Dolnik, A., & Fitzgerald, K. M. 2011). To reduce the amount
of these attacks many countries have begun to come up with
negotiation techniques.
These negotiation techniques are learned to be widely adopted
after the attack that happened in Munich Olympics(1972) to
deal with the situations between the hostage-takers and
authorities (Dolnik, A., & Fitzgerald, K. M. 2011). After
adopting the negotiation techniques for nearly over the span of
40 years results are pretty impressive with the astonishing 95 %
of success rated however this is mostly aimed at the people who
are without no arms. Indeed, the people who take the hostages
have no real intention initially to do such thing, however, has to
opt this option to escape from the cops (Soskis & Van Zandt,
1986). Negotiation techniques are not widely successful when
they are dealing with the terrorists who have the beliefs of
religion because of the fact the motivation of religion is making

9. them kill or get killed. Most of the hostage situation is
conducted by the people who are considered to be mentally
unstable (Soskis & Van Zandt, 1986). So considering all these
situations and with the amount of success fetched with the
negotiation, I would think, it would be wise for the government
in agreeing on the granted immunity, even if they have other
motivations in capturing and prosecuting these terrorists
because innocent people are getting harmed if these negotiation
techniques are gone improperly.
Reference
Dolnik, A., & Fitzgerald, K. M. (2011). Negotiating Hostage
Crises with the New Terrorists. Studies In Conflict &
Terrorism, 34(4), 267-294. doi:10.1080/1057610X.2011.551718.
Soskis, D. A., & Van Zandt, C. R. (1986). Hostage Negotiation:
Law Enforcement's Most Effective Nonlethal
Weapon. Behavioral Sciences & The Law, 4(4), 423-435.
There are a total of ten steps in negotiation planning. The task
at hand is planning a negotiation convincing people to revoke
the ability to smoke in public places. This is the first step where
the goal of negotiation is defined. The second step is the listing
of major issues in the negotiation. The smoker group usually put
forward an argument that their right to smoking freedom is
infringed upon. Another important issue is that the previous
attempts to impose such a law failed in the Kentucky general
assembly. The third step is defining of the weighted importance
of each of the issues at hand. The most devastating impact
smoking will have is the rise in second hand smoking. People
who are not interested in smoking will end up inhaling the
smoke and damage their lungs. Another thing is kids will be
greatly influenced by this and also their health will be affected
because of passive smoking. Some kids will die of sudden infant
death syndrome as a result of passive smoking. The fourth step

10. is the defining of the interest. In this case, the whole people of
Kentucky have their interest in giving their children a smoke
free world. The next step is the defining of alternatives or
BATNAs. The best alternative is allow people in designated
smoking areas within the open spaces. Such restrictive allowing
of smoking will help in reducing passive smoking(Jones, 2015).
The sixth step is defining of limits and a resistance point. In
this case, a resistance point would be school zones. No smoking
can be allowed in school zones and hospital zones. This will at
least help in protecting our young and weak. The seventh step is
the understanding of the other party’s goals. The other party in
this scenario is the tobacco companies and the lawmakers that
are backed by them. Their main goal is to maximize the usage
of tobacco. The tobacco companies wage a proxy war by talking
about the infringement of smoker’s freedom. The eighth step is
the opening bid. In this case, the opening bid is asking for state
wide smoking ban in all public places. The ninth step is the
assessment of the social context of the negotiation. In this case,
there are several people who are victims of passive smoking and
that sets the social context(Hoffman, 2012). The last step is
outlines how the issues will be presented to the other party.
This can be done by making a strong case by bringing kids who
are suffering from tragic illness due to passive smoking.
References:
Jones, A. M., Laporte, A., Rice, N., & Zucchelli, E. (2015). Do
public smoking bans have an impact on active smoking?
evidence from the UK. Health Economics, 24(2), 175. Retrieved
from https://0-search-proquest-
com.library.acaweb.org/docview/1646330721?accountid=9864
Hofmann, A., & Nell, M. (2012). Smoking bans and the
secondhand smoking problem: An economic analysis. The
European Journal of Health Economics : HEPAC, 13(3), 227-36.
doi:http://0-dx.doi.org.library.acaweb.org/10.1007/s10198-011-
0341-z